Blog Comments

I agree. More taxes means more steps towards prohibition, black markets, and crime, as you rightfully point out. It is a little known fact, but it was tobacco taxes, and also tea of course, that helped start the beginnings of the Revolutionary War.

I suspect that the industry started out by reporting mg/g because the NRT industry uses mg as a dosage identifier. Even cigarettes were using mg. But it turned out to be confusing, especially since most of the cartridges held nowhere near a gram of liquid. In Italy, one brand reports mg by how many mg are in the cartridge. Thus an entire research project was run using e-cigs with 7.5 mg of nicotine, which really works out to the equivalent of 24 mg. juice. I think expressing it as a percentage not only helps to avoid confusion for new users regarding "how much nicotine is in that cartridge" but also since 2.4% sounds a lot smaller, it is less frightening to people who know nothing whatsoever about nicotine.

I am all for reasonable regulation and have said so long ago. It would be good to know if the liquid is made under lab conditions or mixed in someones bathtub. That may seem like an over the top statement but with the large amount of venders out their at the moment there is no way of knowing.

The manufacture of swedish snus is highly regulated and must meet certain standards or it's a no go. It would be nice to have that assurance with e-liquid.

I do have some problems with the hardware, and in particular the battery mods. With very few exceptions (Pro Vape being the only one I can think of) the mods are very poorly done as far as safety goes. It appears the fad is for battery mods the brag about being all-machanical. Truth is that is not such a good idea. It may work fine for a mechanical swiss watch, not such a good idea with a battery. Having a mod with a mechanical switch with no backup safety measures is not an accident waiting to happen, it's an accident begging to happen. When something goes wrong, as in a atty short, stuck switch, uncontrolled battery discharge, or any other numerous things that can go wrong, things can very quickly turn very bad.

It would be fine if we could actually trust our government or the regulatory agencies but we know that we cannot. There needs to be a group with folks from all walks and perhaps industries including those who just vape not necessarily all vendors. Comprised of maybe tobacco research scientists without a ANTZ viewpoint and perhaps from tobacco or pharma possibly who believe in HR and maybe one anti everything just to be fair or at least to vote down time and time again.... heehee
C.B.

Some of the concerns that outsiders want addressed really amount to unproven fears. An example is the fear that flavors will attract children to use them. We have documentation that a sizeable percent of us adults no longer like the taste of tobacco and we suspect that switching to flavors helps to extingish urges to go back to smoking.

There are only isolated reports of youth under age 18 using the products, and then only among young smokers looking for a way to quit. Even these reports have been second-hand (e.g. "My daughter says she has a friend that....") If youth are using these devices, I doubt whether flavors entered at all into the decision to give the products a try. Further research is needed. I believe that there is a danger that the products would be made less effective if flavors are banned based on conjecture alone.

Some folks are so concerned about the dangers of poisoning that they would want to require that sealed, tamper-proof cartridges be the only way e-cigarette liquid can be sold. Yet, here we are 7 years after product introduction and there have been no massive cases of poisoning by e-liquid spills. Those of us who started out using the early models often ended up with juice in our mouths due to leaky cartridges, and we had no ill effects.

Again, further research is needed before imposing restrictions on users being able to refill their own cartridges. I suspect that one factor in the product success might be the fact that the users have an extremely fine level of control over nicotine content never before seen in products that contain nicotine, but no tobacco. For example, using the patch, users are forced to drop their nicotine by 50% with each step. Gum comes only in 2 mg and 4 mg doses. What if some users need 6 mg? What if some need only 1 mg or even 0.5 mg?

I believe it is too soon for government to step in regulate such things as flavors and nicotine content.

I'm looking for a concensus among the consumers regarding what they consider to be reasonable and sufficient safety regulations. Additional regulations could be imposed after convincing evidence is compiled showing that public health is endangered by the absence of those regulations.

I love this post!! Professionals, while oftentimes very bright, can have a herd mentality. If the JAMA or whatever it is they are reading says it is so... they will blindly follow the guidelines.

Wait..I sound like a conspiracy theory nut. The way I am talking you would think that the insurance companies who pay the doctors were affiliated with the Government and the FDA. How crazy would that be :-)

Discussing the opposition in Canada to the introduction of of snus, David Sweanor wrote, "Odd then, that some self-described public health advocates would attack the availability of the less toxic alterantive. To follow such a line of reasoning would suggest that we mandate the addition of yet more toxins to cigarettes. After all, if much less toxic products are a bad idea, then much more toxic ones must be a good idea."